Comparative Assessment of the Impact of Integration Depth on the Welfare Dynamics of Member Countries of Key Integration Blocs

The contemporary architecture of international integration is characterised by a multiplicity of models, which differ both in the depth of institutional interaction and in their capacity to generate sustained growth in prosperity. This article presents a comparative analysis of five leading integration blocs worldwide, aimed at identifying the patterns between the formal level of integration and the actual dynamics of economic development among member states. Aim. To verify the hypothesis regarding the cumulative positive effect of progressively deepening integration processes and to determine the nature of the relationship between the depth of integration and the dynamics of prosperity in member states. Tasks. To conduct a comparative analysis of Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita based on Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) in the member states of five integration blocs at different stages of the integration “ladder”; to assess the presence of convergence of economic development levels within each bloc; to identify institutional factors accounting for differences in the trajectories of prosperity growth. Methods. The study is based on comparative and statistical analysis of macroeconomic indicators. The primary indicator is GDP per capita based on PPP. The analysis is carried out for the European Union (EU), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Three key points in time are considered: the moment a country joined the bloc (base year), the current state (2025), and a forecast up to 2030. Results. It is revealed that the nature of integration’s impact on prosperity is determined not so much by the formal stage of development, but by the quality of the institutional architecture and the presence of effective redistribution mechanisms. In the EU, deep institutionalisation has ensured sustained GDP per capita growth and pronounced convergence. In ASEAN, the “soft” integration model has acted as a driver of growth; however, the absence of fiscal equalisation reproduces deep stratification. In MERCOSUR, GDP per capita dynamics are characterised by high volatility and unevenness, while the EAEU demonstrates aggregate growth of the indicator alongside the persistence of an absolute gap between member states. Conclusions. The relationship between the depth of integration and economic efficiency is non-linear. Formal progression along the “stages of integration” is not a necessary condition for prosperity growth. The key criterion of effectiveness is the actual ability of a bloc to generate sustained growth and ensure the harmonious development of all member states at the achieved level of interaction.

1. Butorina, O. V. The European Union and the Long Cycles of Economic Integration // International Trends. 2024. Vol. 22, No. 3-4. P. 6–28. (In Russ.) EDN: FQZCAI. DOI: 10.46272/IT.2024.22.3-4.78-79.1

2. Butorina, O. V., Borko, Yu. A. Benefits of Regional Integration: Towards Redefining the Concept // Contemporary Europe. 2022. No. 1. P. 5–20. (In Russ.) EDN: FOZSGP. DOI: 10.31857/S0201708322010016

3. Kondratieva, N. B. The European Model of Market Integration. Formation and Prospects. Moscow : RAS. 2020. 384 p. ISBN: 978-5-907036-79-6. (In Russ.) EDN: OOEPAD

4. Ushkalova, D. I. Economic Effects of Regional Integration: Myths and Reality // Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2017. No. 4. P. 120–137. (In Russ.) EDN: ZDDBWF

5. Guss, B. After the Boom — Commodity Prices and Economic Growth in Latin America and the Caribbean // IMF Working Paper. 2014. No. 14 (154). P. 1–42. DOI: 10.5089/9781498363518.001

6. Kalsie, A., Pandey, J. Measurement of Eurozone Crisis for PIIGS Nations: Through Composite Indexes Approach // Transnational Corporations Review. 2020. Vol. 12, No. 3. P. 250–264. EDN: OAQOYQ. DOI: 10.1080/19186444.2020.1733370

7. Zettelmeyer, J. Lessons from the 2000–2002 Crisis in Argentina for the Sustainability of the Euro. Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE). 2018. Vol. 16 (03). P. 21–24. URL: https://www.piie.com/sites/default/files/documents/zettelmeyer201809dice-report.pdf